That article was just an example, many newspapers media might have wrote about MSG. But what is the use when they gave voice and the govt. or ‪#‎FSSAI‬ not listening to it?

When you know some ingredient is harmful.. why it is given permission under permissible limits? It is insane to trust business-minded world. Are they going to check every time when a cook sprinkles a handful of ajinomoto on the food which children gonna eat? NO.

“Think twice before you treat your child to a meal of chowmein and chilli chicken. It could impair his mental growth. A snack of potato chips is just as dangerous.

‘Fast food, like rolls, potato chips and chowmein, contain a harmful, taste-enhancing chemical called monosodium glutamate, popularly known as ajinomoto. Unless checked, the effects of this chemical will be more widespread than smoking, since the consumers of fast food outnumber smokers,’ warned Iva Bhattacharya, senior dietician in the state health department and wife of the mayor.

The nutrition division of the department is planning to organise an awareness campaign on the ill-effects of ajinomoto. It also has plans to pressure the state government for a law against use of ajinomoto in food.

Countries like China and Japan have banned the use of ajinomoto in eatables, but the chemical is still indiscriminately used in almost all fast food preparations available in Calcutta, from chanachur to soup.

‘Unfortunately, most parents are not aware of the harm they’re doing to their child by giving them food containing ajinomoto,’ added Bhattacharya.

‘There are other problems as well with fast food. For example, preparation of potato chips involves heating of oil above 400 degrees Centigrade. The high temperature decomposes fatty acids in potatoes. This impairs elasticity of blood vessels and raises blood pressure,’ she said.

According to doctors, Ajinomoto is not only detrimental to the development of brain cells, but is also carcinogenic. It takes around seven to eight years for the harmful effects of the chemical to manifest in children.” – Credits : The Telegraph, Kolkata

This 4th edition of the GGEI is an in-depth look at how 60 countries perform in the global green economy, as well as how expert practitioners rank this performance and ranks based on perception.

Performance Rank

SCORE

1

Sweden

68.1

2

Norway

65.9

3

Costa Rica

64.2

4

Germany

63.6

5

Denmark

63.2

6

Switzerland

63.1

7

Austria

63

8

Finland

62.9

9

Iceland

62.6

10

Spain

59.2

11

Ireland

59

12

New Zealand

58.8

13

France

56.4

14

Colombia

56.1

15

Portugal

55.8

16

Peru

55.8

17

Kenya

55.4

18

Brazil

55.3

19

Chile

55.1

20

United Kingdom

54.6

21

Netherlands

54.2

22

Uruguay

54.1

23

Mauritius

51.5

24

Zambia

51.3

25

Italy

51.2

26

Ethiopia

50.6

27

Rwanda

50.4

28

United States

50.1

29

Canada

49.6

30

Taiwan

47.5

31

Mexico

47.4

32

Philippines

47.2

33

Israel

47

34

South Africa

46.8

35

Malaysia

46.4

36

Tanzania

46.2

37

Australia

46.1

38

Czech Republic

46

39

South Korea

45.6

40

United Arab Emirates

45.6

41

Burkina Faso

45.2

42

Cambodia

44.9

43

Turkey

44.8

44

Japan

44.6

45

Thailand

44.5

46

Ghana

44.5

47

Belgium

44.1

48

Argentina

43.8

49

India

43.4

50

Slovakia

43

51

Panama

41.5

52

Morocco

41.5

53

Mozambique

41

54

Indonesia

40.3

55

China

40.1

56

Poland

37.1

57

Senegal

33.4

58

Qatar

33.3

59

Vietnam

32.2

60

Mongolia

29.5

The perception survey for the 2014 GGEI was conducted from June through August 2014, and polled targeted respondents on how they assessed national green performance on the four main dimensions of Leadership & Climate Change, Efficiency Sectors, Markets & Investment, and Environment & Natural Capital.

Perception Rank

SCORE

1

Germany

93.6

2

Denmark

92.8

3

Sweden

90.2

4

Norway

84.8

5

Netherlands

84

6

United States

76.2

7

Japan

72.4

8

United Kingdom

71.6

9

Finland

70.2

10

Switzerland

67.8

11

Australia

66.3

12

Canada

63

13

China

61.6

14

Costa Rica

60.4

15

Brazil

59.7

16

India

56.1

17

Austria

55.1

18

New Zealand

52

19

Iceland

49.1

20

France

48.5

21

Spain

46.7

22

South Africa

45.8

23

South Korea

44.1

24

Israel

41.1

25

United Arab Emirates

40.3

26

Kenya

40

27

Malaysia

39.3

28

Mexico

37.1

29

Italy

36.1

30

Belgium

36

31

Indonesia

35.3

32

Peru

35

33

Ireland

34.3

34

Mauritius

34

35

Chile

33.5

36

Tanzania

33.3

37

Ethiopia

33.1

38

Philippines

33

39

Morocco

32.6

40

Portugal

32.5

41

Colombia

31.6

42

Poland

31.5

43

Qatar

31.2

44

Turkey

31.2

45

Vietnam

31.1

46

Taiwan

30.7

47

Argentina

30.2

48

Rwanda

30.1

49

Zambia

30

50

Mozambique

29.8

51

Thailand

29.3

52

Czech Republic

29.2

53

Cambodia

28.9

54

Ghana

28.7

55

Burkina Faso

28.5

56

Slovakia

28.2

57

Mongolia

27.7

58

Uruguay

27.6

59

Panama

27.4

60

Senegal

27.3

Germany (perception) and Sweden (performance) top the 2014 GGEI, confirming a trend observed in prior editions of strong results by Germany and the Nordic states. Besides performing well on both the economic and environmental areas of the GGEI, these nations display consistent green leadership and receive global recognition for it.

Covered for the first time in this edition, Costa Rica performs extremely well, ranking third on the GGEI performance measure behind Sweden and Norway and receiving strong recognition on the perception survey, an impressive result for such a small country.

Like in 2012, Copenhagen is the top green city as ranked by our survey of global experts, reinforcing the continued strength of the Danish green brand. Tracked for the first time this year, Vancouver and Singapore also rank in the top 10 of green cities.

Many of the fastest growing economies in the world rank poorly on the GGEI performance measure, highlighting an urgent need to reorient their economies to greener

There are concerning results related to more developed countries as well – notably Australia, Japan, the Netherlands and the United States – where perceptions of their green economic performance dramatically exceed their actual performance on the GGEI. These countries appear to receive more credit than they deserve, an information gap that requires further exploration.

Despite its leadership founding the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI), South Korea continues not to register as a green country brand on our survey and performs poorly, ranked 39th out of 60 on this year’s GGEI. Despite better perception results, Japan also performs poorly on the 2014 GGEI, ranked 44th out of 60.

While the United Kingdom performs adequately in most areas of the GGEI, it doesn’t excel on any one topic, possibly due to inconsistent political rhetoric and policy related to green economy there. While gradually improving in each successive GGEI edition, the UK still lags behind its northern European and Nordic competitors.

The GGEI results reveal a similar observation for a variety of non-European states – including Ethiopia, Mauritius, Rwanda in Africa and Colombia, Chile and Peru in Latin America – again suggesting a need for these states to better position their green economies on the international stage.

Many questioned me “What is Propel Steps? What are you doing now? that too in a small town!”

I believe in Einstein’s saying “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.”

So I answered them “I am building an organization to bring social changes via Education. Propel Steps will enable students and the society by educating them on what is not taught in the current education system!”

Explaining any issue can be simple, but solving the issue is complex. I aimed to do the both via ‪#‎PropelSteps‬. After almost two years of home work, learning and hard work. Now I am changing the gears.

This is the most debated news on Indian media now! Maybe for this week, till we get another sensational news. Political parties are taking their respective pickings to do politics. Blaming one another and trying to follow their traditional strategy to make people fools. None of the political parties ever tried to resolve the agricultural issues on a serious move. So many projects are been dragged for political and business reasons. Meanwhile, farmers are continuing to commit suicide across the country. When the media covered a single farmer’s suicide on daylight, the politicians are ‘ullu banaving’ making fool of us.

Why no Indian Political party is focusing on the solution to end this? They are fighting over how to acquire lands from farmers by various laws to favours industries. Why no one is talking about Indian Rivers Inter-link project?

Rivers Inter-Link, Himalayan and Peninsular Components

Indian regions in blue were inundated with floods for 6 weeks of havoc starting with the first week of July

The Indian Rivers Inter-link is a proposed large-scale civil engineering project that aims to link India‘s rivers by a network of reservoirs and canals and so reduce persistent floods in some parts and water shortages in other parts of India. Which can address the causes of farmer suicides and also enrich the Environment of the whole country!

The raw truth is, projects like inter-linking rivers would unite the people of India together. Maybe while executing the project some politics may happen but once the project gets completed the whole nation will get the benefits of it. People will come together ahead of their regional and states differences. Which will revamp agriculture, India will become more of a Green Nation than an industrial nation. This of course, will prevent Industrialists to an extent and prevent politicians’ tie up with Industries and they cannot make easy money. That’s why such effective projects are kept on hold or progressing at snail pace!

As of 2013, a total of 296,438 farmers had killed themselves in India since 1995.[4]Most farm suicides have been linked to debt, a sharp rise in input costs, serious water crises, price volatility and crop failure due to pest attacks and disease. India is an agrarian country with around 60% of its people depending directly or indirectly upon agriculture. Farmer suicides account for 11.2% of all suicides in India.[1]

In Britain farmers are taking their own lives at a rate of one a week.  In India, one farmer committed suicide every 32 minutes between 1997 and 2005. Read more from UN’s article here

The following data is bit old, but shared here for analytical purpose.

¶Note: “Reasons were given by close relatives and friends. There are multiple reasons for suicides. Not even one case was given only one reason.”[27]

Indian Politicians must understand that people are no fools and we can read their minds so well! Instead of blaming one another, they must act upon solutions. Shame on them if they continue doing politics with Farmers and commoners of this country.

Magnets always fascinate us and a favourite topic for many physics lovers. Magnets just not have the property to attract metals but also attracted the interests of modern day scientists. The principle of magnetism is been applied many utilities in our daily life.

Ever since the issue of global warming and fossil fuels popped up, the world is looking for an alternate energy. Transportation is one of the major factors when it comes to greenhouse gases.

How about using magnets for transportation? A transport without any fuel? without any emission? Is that possible?

Maglev Transportation is the first step towards a great future. Let us learn more about it.

What is Maglev?

Maglev (derived from magnetic levitation) is a transport method that uses magnetic levitation to move vehicles without touching the ground. With maglev, a vehicle travels along a guideway using magnets to create both lift and propulsion, thereby reducing friction and allowing higher speeds.

When you were a kid, you might have tried to balance one magnet in the air using other magnets. The same basic principle is applied using electromagnetic (maglev) tracks.

The Differences

The big difference between a maglev train and a conventional train is that maglev trains do not have an engine — at least not the kind of engine used to pull typical train cars along steel tracks. The engine for maglev trains is rather inconspicuous. Instead of using fossil fuels, the magnetic field created by the electrified coils in the guideway walls and the track combine to propel the train.

Comparison with conventional trains

Maglev transport is non-contact and electric powered. It relies less or not at all on the wheels, bearings and axles common to wheeled rail systems.

Maintenance: Maglev trains currently in operation have demonstrated the need for minimal guideway maintenance. Vehicle maintenance is also minimal (based on hours of operation, rather than on speed or distance traveled). Traditional rail is subject to mechanical wear and tear that increases exponentially with speed, also increasing maintenance.

Weather: Maglev trains are little affected by snow, ice, severe cold, rain or high winds. However, they have not operated in the wide range of conditions that traditional friction-based rail systems have operated.[citation needed] Maglev vehicles accelerate and decelerate faster than mechanical systems regardless of the slickness of the guideway or the slope of the grade because they are non-contact systems.

Track: Maglev trains are not compatible with conventional track, and therefore require custom infrastructure for their entire route. By contrast conventional high-speed trains such as the TGV are able to run, albeit at reduced speeds, on existing rail infrastructure, thus reducing expenditure where new infrastructure would be particularly expensive (such as the final approaches to city terminals), or on extensions where traffic does not justify new infrastructure.

Weight: The electromagnets in many EMS and EDS designs require between 1 and 2 kilowatts per ton. The use of superconductor magnets can reduce the electromagnets’ energy consumption. A 50-ton Transrapid maglev vehicle can lift an additional 20 tons, for a total of 70 tons, which consumes 70-140 kW.[citation needed] Most energy use for the TRI is for propulsion and overcoming air resistance at speeds over 100 mph.[citation needed]

Weight loading: High speed rail requires more support and construction for its concentrated wheel loading. Maglev cars are lighter and distribute weight more evenly.

Noise: Because the major source of noise of a maglev train comes from displaced air rather than from wheels touching rails, maglev trains produce less noise than a conventional train at equivalent speeds. However, the psychoacoustic profile of the maglev may reduce this benefit: a study concluded that maglev noise should be rated like road traffic, while conventional trains experience a 5–10 dB “bonus”, as they are found less annoying at the same loudness level.

Braking: Braking and overhead wire wear have caused problems for the Fastech 360 rail Shinkansen. Maglev would eliminate these issues.

Magnet reliability: At higher temperatures magnets may fail. New alloys and manufacturing techniques have addressed this issue.

Control systems: No signalling systems are needed for high-speed rail, because such systems are computer controlled. Human operators cannot react fast enough to manage high-speed trains. High speed systems require dedicated rights of way and are usually elevated. Two maglev system microwave towers are in constant contact with trains. There is no need for train whistles or horns, either.

Terrain: Maglevs are able to ascend higher grades, offering more routing flexibility and reduced tunneling.

Comparison with aircraft

Differences between airplane and maglev travel:

Efficiency: For maglev systems the lift-to-drag ratio can exceed that of aircraft (for example Inductrack can approach 200:1 at high speed, far higher than any aircraft). This can make maglev more efficient per kilometer. However, at high cruising speeds, aerodynamic drag is much larger than lift-induced drag. Jets take advantage of low air density at high altitudes to significantly reduce air drag. Hence despite their lift-to-drag ratio disadvantage, they can travel more efficiently at high speeds than maglev trains that operate at sea level.

Routing: While aircraft can theoretically take any route between points, commercial air routes are rigidly defined. Maglevs offer competitive journey times over distances of 800 kilometres (500 miles) or less. Additionally, maglevs can easily serve intermediate destinations.

Availability: Maglevs are little affected by weather.

Safety: Maglevs offer a significant safety margin since maglevs do not crash into other maglevs or leave their guideways.

Travel time: Maglevs do not face the extended security protocols faced by air travelers nor is time consumed for taxiing, or for queuing for take-off and landing.

Despite decades of research and development, only two commercial maglev transport systems are in operation, with two others under construction. The highest recorded maglev speed is 603 km/h (375 mph), achieved in Japan by JR Central’s L0 superconducting Maglev on 2015 April,21. The Japanese trains use super-cooled, superconducting electromagnets. This kind of electromagnet can conduct electricity even after the power supply has been shut off.